Skip to main content

tv   Charlie Rose  PBS  July 21, 2017 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT

12:00 pm
>> rose: welcome to the program. we begin this evening with politics and a controversial interview that the president had with the "new york times." he talked about attorney general jeff sessions and we talked to robert costa of "the washington post" and washington week on pbs. >> the president himself when he sat down with the "new york times" made the decision to make these on the record claims that they were quite shocked by some elements of the west wing and went on the record with these comments. they interpreted some of the senior officials as a push out the door. that sessions would wake up thursday morning and say i could no longer perhaps serve as attorney general. and in any other administration, this kind of dynamic, a president speaking out against his own cabinet member, his own attorney general would prompt a resignation. >> rose: we continue this evening with the sad news that
12:01 pm
senator john mccain has brain cancer. we talked to cbs news contributor dr. david agus. >> very aggressive brain cancer is take it out and leave no tumor behind. that was accomplished. that's a big step four. >> rose: finally o.j. simpson was granted parole today so we talked to rikki klieman a consultant to cbs news. >> it was a long hearing indeed and i think it had a really rocky start. the first question to o.j. simpson when he went into that room in las vegas, nevada back in 2007, what was he thinking. so the obvious answer if a lawyer had coached him, presented him for that answer was, i wasn't thinking at all. i shouldn't have gone in there. if i had thought then i wouldn't have gone in. instead, o.j. simpson decided to tell his story.
12:02 pm
and it was relitigating the entire kidnapping and robbery case from simpson's perspective which is it's everyone else's fault but mind. >> rose: we turn to part two of a conversation with mohammad javad zarif foreign minister of iran. >> for their own citizens because that is for iran, for instance, that is where we derive our legitimacy. that's where we derive our security, our economic well being and prosperity because we don't get that from outside. the reality on the ground, with all the sanctions, with all the pressure, with all the wars, with all the containments, we're prospering, we're surviving, we're making progress. we're number five in scientific articles in the field of nanotechnology. we're among the top ten in many
12:03 pm
areas of science and technology. we rely that, we achieved that by relying on our people. >> rose: we conclude this evening with three comedy film makers, judd apatow, michael showalter and lucia aniello. >> when you get a bunch of comedians together there's a way they talk to each other that is not something you learn. it's just who we are. it's the same way if you get five musicians together there's a very good chance they'll start to jam. >> rose: the president and his attorney general jeff sessions, john mccain's cancer diagnosis, o.j. simpson's parole, the foreign minister of iran and three comedy film makers. all of that when we continue. >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by the following:
12:04 pm
>> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: we begin this evening with politics and an interview with the "new york times" wednesday. president trump revealed he would not have named jeff sessions, attorney general, had he known sessions would recuse himself from the russian investigation. the president told reporters, i would have picked somebody else. on thursday sessions announced he would remain in his post as attorney general, quote, as long as that is appropriate. today also marks six months in president trump took office. joining me now from washington, robert costa, he's a national
12:05 pm
political reporter for the post. i am pleased to have him on this program, welcome back. let's talk to jeff sessions and decided to stay on and what the split with the president mean and what can we read into it. >> it was a stunning and revealing moment at the same time, charlie, to have the president sit down with our friends peter baker and maggie haberman and michael smith at the "new york times" to jeff sessions his long time alley's decision to recuse himself from the investigation. ever since then charlie, my reporting bears this out. the president has been furious behind the scenes because he believes that sessions' recusal has left him personally and his administration vulnerable to attack from democrats, vulnerable to the special counsel now being run by bob mueller and it's create a cloud, a suffocating cloud around the
12:06 pm
whitehouse where the rest of the agenda seems to get stalled day by day. and he administrations a -- traces this back at sessions who he thought would be his man at the justice department. >> rose: some say it was the firing of james quo me hiring bob mueller and if he didn't listen to those to fire comey he wouldn't have had the special prosecutor put in place by the deputy attorney general. >> that's exactly right. there's a lot of swirling factors here that have led the president to this point. it's not just sessions recusing himself. it is a decision by the president to have a private conversation with the former fbi director but then prompted the special counsel, it prompted all the reshuffling within the investigative units and the justice department. my sores at the whitehouse say charlie that the president believes that he really doesn't have an exit plan here. his lawyers, he's brought so many in, both on the insight team and the outside team are telling him to be more
12:07 pm
disciplined, to not weigh in on the day by day developments. but the president feels like he has to be his own defender. that came through in the "new york times" interview. without sessions fighting his fight, without his lawyers being out there in an aggressive way, he thinks he has to be the spokesman and the warrior at the same time. >> rose: what happens to jeff sessions as attorney general? >> it is an intrigue drama within the trump administration. i've covered the now attorney general for a long time, back to his senate days and he was the ideological core for what trumpism became in 2015 and 2016, this populist nationalist fusion of conservative politics and activism and anger, it's often credited to steve bannon the chief whitehouse strategist but in fact the attorney general sessions has been cultivating these kind of political themes for a long time. he was the first senator to endorse trump during the campaign. that's why he was first in line to be appointed attorney
12:08 pm
general. and he was important in the early days of this administration, shaping the executive action on immigration, helping the president think through criminal justice policy. but because of that recusal, you see trump, his personality come to the fore, he's someone who is so transactional, so determined to make decisions based on the public imagination and where he stands. if sessions was no longer helpful, he was out. and we haven't seen him be part of the center circle ever since. >> rose: did the president want him to resign. >> people inside the whitehouse say the president himself when he sat down with the "new york times" made the decision to make these on the record claims that they were quite shocked by in some elements of west wing that he went on the record with these comments. they interpreted some of the senior officials as a push out the door, that sessions would wake up on thursday morning and say i could no longer perhaps seven as attorney general. and in any other administration, this kind of dynamic, a
12:09 pm
president speaking out against his own cabinet member or his own attorney general would prompt a resignation. but the president actually dislikes confrontation, direct confrontation, we see this throughout his career. so you see sessions isolated over at the justice department not really sure how to interpret what happened in the "new york times" interview. this was not some strategic out burst, that was an outburst by the president in an interview. that's why you had sessions on thursday morning come out and say in fact i'm going to stay. we'll see how long that lasts. >> rose: how does this all fit into the russian probe. there will be hearings i guess next week, some private some open. >> there are a lot of questions that remain about paul manafort, the former campaign chairman, don, jr. the son who happened the meeting last summer with russian figures and jared kushner the son-in-law and senior advisor. they all have promised they would like to speak to the senate intelligence committee. the question that's been up in the air is whether these will be
12:10 pm
open hearings, whether they will be closed hearings with senators with kushner. it looks like it's going to be closed. we'll see if it even happens. with don jr. and paul manafort, likely to be closed hearings. you see the senators right now, charlie, trying to move forward with their own investigation, mark warner the democrat from virginia, richard borrow from north carolina, they want to show their voters and constituencies progress, that's why you see this flurry on capitol hill. the real story as ever is bob mueller and special council what he's looking into and you see in that "new york times" interview real news that the president's concern muller is looking into his personal finances in the trump organization. >> rose: some speculate that's the reason all along why donald trump did not want to reveal his income taxes. >> the question about russian
12:11 pm
money past ventures over the last decade has been an unanswered question throughout this entire process. clearly if you just look at the president's remarks, he's skittish about the idea the tacks returns being reviewed by mueller or elements of his financial record being finally reviewed. because the president believes he can perhaps escape any kind of obstruction charge or how he handled the investigation with comey and others. if it becomes a broader investigation with a scope that goes way back into the 1980's, 19 0's when he was struggling with his finances, when his businesses were in death and hw foreign inversus played in it that's something he doesn't want to confront. >> rose: bob costa from "the washington post." thank you so much. >> thank you. >> rose: we'll be right back.
12:12 pm
stay with us. >> rose: we continue this evening with john mccain's brain cancer diagnosis. the tumor was discovered after mccain underwent a procedure to remove a blood clot above his left eye. lab results later revealed that a primary brain tumor known as a glee owe blastoma. dr. david agus talks with me to talk about this new diagnosis. he's one of the leading oncologists in the country and i'm pleased to have him here. what can you tell me based on the reports you have seen in the press and friends you know in the medical community about the condition. >> glee owe blastoma is an aggressive brain cancer. take it out and leave nothing behind. that was accomplished. that's a big step. what what he now know if you gave the patient chemotherapy and radiation therapy toying they will live longer and delay
12:13 pm
the time until it comes back. unfortunately it comes back in many all cases. but putting the two together will delay it coming back. >> rose: is there a race with time in this manner. the progress in treating cancer and brain cancer is of such a velocity that you never know what might be possible six months from now because of tests that are under way and the like. >> no question about it. so much is going on in this space now that it really is exciting and all of us in the field are jumping up and down. we can target genes called molecularly targeted therapy. we can reactivate the immune system to attack the cancer itself. some are on the market but most are what we call clinical trials being developed now. every time you make a decision in his care the first question is it the right decision and also does it preclude you from getting something down the pike, that may be even more exciting. >> rose: what is the, what
12:14 pm
are the prospects for most people who have this? is it a life term of a year or two years or i know that you cannot make specific conclusions unless you know the patient. and even then it's difficult. >> this unfortunately behaves very similar in most patients. his course will be now about three or four weeks after surgery, so three or four weeks from last friday, he will start oral chemotherapy together with radiation therapy that will last six weeks. the raidation is monday through forty for about six weeks. there's then a month off and then six months of taking an oral pill chemotherapy and then you stop. you wait for it to recur. unfortunately recurrence hops in almost all patients. at that point we can try experimental therapy. there are therapies like duke university where they can put the virus into the brain cancer which makes it more foreign to
12:15 pm
the immune system and the immune system can attack the cancer. there are several cases that have been reported withdrawallic responses that have failed almost everything and they're alive years later. there is hope for the first time in this disease. >> rose: what causes this disease? >> it's luck of the draw unfortunately. if you have history of a mutant gene called p53 for example. in most cases it's the luck of the jaw. even though the margins are clear it comes back in many all cases. in the old days decades ago they took out half the brain with this cancer and there was no better outcome than when they take out just the cancer itself. because these tentacles go throughout the brain. an amazing adaptive mechanism of this cancer. >> rose: does brain cancer spread faster than most cancers or not? >> well many connors are -- cancers are limited where they can spread. the brain is an area where they can keep invading.
12:16 pm
so it's very hard to actually go in and do things because obviously the brain we need the function. people can get very symptomatic when it grows one millimeter because it may push on the neuron function or sensory function. pancreatic conference can grow very large before you're symptomatic. slight changes can cause problems just like we saw with senator mccain a week ago when he had some issues speaking sentences, that may have been from the inflammation associated with the cancer. >> rose: including a sense, senator lindsay graham said he had been tired and feeling more fatigued, as i said over the last several weeks. >> your body talks to you. when that conference is there, it's not just a cancer but it causes inflammation. that pushes pressure in other areas of the brain. so when they take it out that information abates and classally patients feel a lot better. >> rose: i know you and everyone else in america is hoping for the best not only for
12:17 pm
senator mccain but also in recognition of the fighting spirit that he has exhibited in his public and private life. david, thank you for joining us. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: we'll be right back. stay with us. >> rose: o.j. simpson will be released after serving nine years for armed robbery. a board queue in an mustily voted to shorten his hearing. the football player previously faced trial in 195 for the murder of his exwife nicole brown simpson and the murder of his friend ronald goldman. o.j. simpson was acquitted in the most watched court case in history. here is the report from the cbs evening news this evening. >> > mr. simpson, i do vote to grant parole when eligible. and that will conclude this hearing. >> thank you. >> his relief was obvious.
12:18 pm
o.j. simpson now 70 years old will be soon be free on parole. >> it was a serious crime and there's no excuse for it. >> the video conference lasted more than an hour as they asked simpson how prison changed him. >> are you humbled by this incarceration. >> yes. >> while expressing regret he insisted it was others who decided to bring days the day in las vegas they robbed of items simpson believed had been stolen from him. >> i didn't pull a gun on anybody. i never have in my life. never been accused of it in my life. >> one of them told the parole board simpson serve the enough time. >> this is a good man, he made a mistake. >> simpson's oldest daughter. >> we want him to come home so we can move forward for us quietly. >> i'm not a guy that will live to terminal life.
12:19 pm
i'm a pretty straight shooter. >> hanging over the hearing was the accusation in 1994 that he brutalled murdered his exwife nicole and his friend ron goldman. >> i felt i've been pretty good with people and i basically spent a conflict free life. >> one of the least self aware moments that i ever heard. >> law professor lori leavenson. >> one of the things you might say about o.j. simpson and that acquittal was fair but to say he led a conflict free life. i don't think so. >> simpson will remain in prison until at least october 1st. he says he wants to live in florida where he lived before his nevada conviction but professional board in both states must agree. >> rose: joining me is rikki klieman a former prosecutor. i'm pleased to have you on this program. welcome. >> thank you. >> rose: tell me about o.j.'s parole. >> it was a long hearing indeed and i think it had a really
12:20 pm
rocky start. the first question to be o.j. simpson was when he went into that room in las vegas, nevada back in 2007, what was he thinking. so the obvious answer if a lawyer had coached him, prepared him for that answer was, i wasn't thinking at all. i shouldn't have gone in there if i had thought then i wouldn't have gone in. instead, o.j. simpson decided to tell his story. and it was relitigating the entire kid in aning and robbery case from simpson's perspective which is it's everyone else's fault but mine. so i thought to myself this was not the way to begin. but eventually he redeems himself by expressing remorse, by expressing how sorry he was not only to his victim but also to the people of the state of nevada and explaining how he tried to redeem himself by being
12:21 pm
a model prisoner. in addition, we not only heard from his lawyer but we heard from his daughter and we heard from one of the victims to me the most important, the most important. he supported parole but it was more significant than that. he was actually powerfully emotionally moving in what is supposed to be a fact-based hearing. he talked about what indignity and fear he has sunday as a -- suffered as a result of this event. he didn't toss that aside but he talked about sinceson being a good man. it wasn't he was there because he was o.j. simpson's friend for 20 years, he was there because it was the right thing to do that this sent sentence was tog and he himself want simpson to do one to three years.
12:22 pm
he ended his testimony with words to the effect if you want me to come pick me up for i don't remember release, i'll be with you, juice. you saw simpson and you saw finally some really profound emotion and thankfulness for this friendship. and i think that that was critical in what otherwise is simply a grid of factors. >> rose: how important is being a model prisoner. >> very important. >> rose: he was that. >> he was that. >> rose: everybody agrees with that. >> no disciplinary infractions for nine years almost unheard of. >> rose: remorse is important. >> critical. >> rose: he did that. >> he did that. >> rose: what else is important. >> i think what else is important is what activities he was doing in the prison to show that he was under going not only rehabilitation there but that in fact if he were to be released, that he would not be a threat to others in society. so we had the good and the bad with that. let's start with the bad.
12:23 pm
he was asked, requested back in 2013 at his last parole hearing to do something about alcohol because he had been using alcohol the day of this kidnapping and burglary. he said today i decided to do that because i didn't have a problem with alcohol. i thought this is really bad. let's look at the good. he talked about the programs that he did do and that the most important one to him, which he felt should be mandatory for all inmates was a program about how you deal with violence. and it was a program about talking things down. and i think that that program itself in addition to taking vocational training for computer science. why? so he could communicate with his children. but his realization that he needed to do this program that he would then be able to talk to
12:24 pm
people and not react. >> rose: thank you, rikki. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: back in a moment stay with us. >> rose: we begin this evening with part two of a conversation with the minister of around, mohammad javad zarif. we talked about issues tha separate united states from iran and we listened to how the foreign minister understands america. we continue the conversation now. this is before the election of 2016. occasionally i would hear someone say five to ten years now the united states will be closer to iran than it is to saudi arabia. >> we were not competing for u.s. favor. >> rose: you know what i mean. the geo political world is changing. >> well i think the united
12:25 pm
states need to reevaluate the achievements of the united states and the failures of the united states in our region. and based on that, based on that reassessment, we will see. the role and the place of various countries in the region we certainly hope and we're not competing with saudi arabia. we believe that iran and saudi arabia should be a part of a regional dialogue for i wrote an op ed in the "new york times" several years ago. >> rose: i remember. >> for a dialogue. i think that's what's lacking in our region. as soon as our saudi neighbors are ready to engage in dialogue in resolving issues through dialogue not through pressure because been unfortunately this has become a habit of either using the united states in order to put pressure on different countries or the countries that they can impose direct pressure to impose direct pressure. >> rose: does this include
12:26 pm
israel. >> modest. i'm talking about our immediate neighbor and that is persian gulf. it's not too modest because all of the wars in recent years from the iraqi invasion of iran to iraqi invasion of kuwait, to u.s. operations to liberate kuwait from iraqi, to operations against iraq to isis and all of them, to yemen. so let's concentrate, let's not be too ambitious, that's concentrate on this region. >> rose: no israel now. >> no. which has been the hot bed of extremism, violence and war and conflict. and let's deal witness. we are ready to deal with it. we are ready to revolve the problem. we are ready to engage in dialogue and confidence building measures. and we believe that others should not look for an enemy. there is no need for an enemy. we don't need an enemy.
12:27 pm
we already have enough enemies. enemies from -- >> rose: so you don't see the united states as an enemy. >> i'm talking about our immediate neighbor. the united states can be fine its relations with iran. at this time and for some time the united states has defined its relations with iran in terms of hostility. this is nothing new. not particular to this administration. unfortunately the united states has followed the hostile policy towards iran and it has received a reciprocal -- >> rose: from president obama. >> president obama pursued hostility towards iran and then he came to the conclusions towards the ends of his administration that he needed to find a negotiated way only with regard to the nuclear issue. while the united states continued their hostile policies vis-a-vis iran and other issues -- >> rose: but it was iran that insisted we don't want to talk
12:28 pm
about our behavior. we do not want to talk about issues, you wanted the nuclear deal but you did not want to be on the table, iranian behavior. as the united states would define it as supporting extremism and terrorism. >> well you see, we wanted to limit the immediate discussion to the nuclear issue so not to complicate it. but it wasn't the issue of behavior because iran has even more grievances about u.s. behavior. how about the fact that the united states, you and i have been at this table discussing the fact in 2003, if you remember. >> rose: right. >> where i predicted that u.s. invasion of iraq will lead to more extremism in our region. now we are, we have witnesses, we have problems with u.s. behavior. but with the nuclear issue we
12:29 pm
thought that this was a burning issue needed to be resolved. it should not be further complicated by adding extraneous element. but even then we said if we can make progress on this issue to rules the mutual -- reduce the mutual lack of trust then we can move to other -- >> rose: is that possible. >> the behavior by the united states particularly during the obama administration and the new administration -- with stuff that is taking place with the statements coming from the whitehouse. yesterday, even in order to certify that iran has complied. they made sure that they put some new designations against iran at the same time so that they would prevent iran from benefiting from the economic dividends of the nuclear. this has been the persistent and
12:30 pm
consistent policy of this administration, even previous administration. this administration is more open in stating it. i'm very happy that the rest of the national community is continuing to do business with iran inspite of the the rhetoric coming from washington. that's what's keeping the nuclear deal alive. i believe the nuclear deal is alive because the rest of the world and iran want to keep it alive. because it's a multilateral agreement and it's being kept alive by people who are engaging with iran and i believe it will continue to be so. i believe the united states in all honesty, somebody who has study the united states for a very very long time, i can tell you it was in the national interest of the united states to revisit its policy with regard to our region, to reassess where it went wrong, where it went this policy of applying double standards to our region. i mean, the range of issues that
12:31 pm
you said would be of concern in our behavior to the united states. we have similar concerns, in addition to that we have a concern about the application of double standards on human rights. human rights. which of of your allies of the united states in the region has a record even close to iraq. >> rose: to iraq. >> to iran in terms of respect for human rights. >> rose: it's hard for me because every time, you know, every time anyone knows that you are going to be here and i saw this with margaret brennan, my colleague at cbs, they bring up one case after another. and the answer always is look, that's up to the judiciary not to the iranian government. that's the human right question. >> no. i'll deal with that.
12:32 pm
but let us just make a comparison. iraq under saddam hussein was not being criticized by its human rights violation until it invaded kuwait. other governments in the region never heard of ballot box, never heard of a vote. have no representatives. we don't have hardly any rights and nobody complains about their human rights. >> rose: no, i mean, if you -- >> the u.s. allies. they don't have any human rights, are there any human rights sanctions against any of your other allies? why are they imposed on iran. >> rose: i'm just saying with respect to saudi arabia they do raise the question. >> yes, very nicely. but not a single sowdyian is designated by the united states and i don't like them to be designate because i don't believe it's a wrong policy, i don't believe it's a right policy but to compare not a
12:33 pm
single individual in saudi arabia where innocent human beings are beheaded, has been under human rights designation list in the united states. that tells you a lot about these u.s. concerns about iranian behavior. because those concerns -- >> rose: it's more a question of geo politics than it is values. >> it is only questions of geo politics because we lived under the shah. i to escape, come to the united states because of his violations of human rights. but did the united states ever -- >> rose: let's assume that the state should speak out, and you're correct, should speak out against human rights violations, not only with its allies but also within its own country. there are those kinds -- >> everybody can improve their human rights. >> rose: human rights ought to be the guide regardless whether they are friend or foe. >> i agree. but humans rights must be first
12:34 pm
and foremost ear concern of each individual country for their own citizens because that is for iran for instance, that is how we derive our legitimacy and our security and our economic well being and prosperity because we don't get that from outside. just look at the reality on the ground. with all the sanctions, with all the pressure, with all the wars, with all the containments. we are prospering. we're surviving. we're making progress. we're number five in scientific because in the field of nanotechnology, we're among the top 10 in many areas of science ask technology. we rely that, we achieve that by relying on our people. >> rose: i would say to that good for you. >> yes, it is good for us but we get it inspite of the fact we are under restriction.
12:35 pm
that tells you about, that tells you something about our relations with our own people. now every country can improve its human rights record. >> rose: including iran. >> including obviously including iran. that is why the president of iran has put out a charter of the rights of the citizens. we believe that excessive exists. we need to address those competitions -- excesses and we need to, because that's how we derive our legitimacy from our people so we have to respect them. more and simple. this was one of the major topics during our election campaign, and president is very clear on that. >> rose: we have to do better on human rights. >> much better, much better. but there are others in our region who are far far behind. >> rose: but also you put -- >> but the united states never
12:36 pm
complains about them. they are not designated by the united states. they support terrorism, not a single one of them is designated. they are sending terrorists to your territories for 9/11. >> rose: they have to be careful about that. they were saudis but it wasn't proven they were sent by the saudi government -- >> did you know -- >> rose: are you -- >> did you know a court in new york condemn iran are for participating in 9/11? fined us $11 billion for participating in 9/11. do you want me to buy this? come on. go to new york, go read the court documents. a court in new york awarded $11 billion to the victims of 9/11 against iraq. now you're telling me nobody has proven that saudi arabia was
12:37 pm
behind it? i think those final judgments came out -- let me tell you something that you're familiar with. president trump banned citizens of six countries from coming to the united states. it included iraq. >> rose: it did. >> now iranians in the united states are outstanding citizens. >> rose: they are. >> they are outstanding members of their own community. >> rose: they are. >> good physicians, good scientists, silicon valley may go, they may not be as prosperous if it's not for iranians. >> rose: if you want me to say and i just said that iranians have come to the united states and made human contributions. let me finish. who we are. they have. they come here and made a huge contribution to the united states. >> so why you -- >> rose: so have immigrants from all over the world have come here. one of the values that the united states stands for. >> charlie, why did they -- >> rose: do you agree with
12:38 pm
that? >> yeah, i do. and that is why it's mind-boggling for me to say that iranians have been singled out as one of the six countries in the ban, in the travel ban by president trump. that's an affront. >> rose: therefore cause you to have great respect for the american system that courts have said it can not happen. >> actually at the end of the day they allowed it to go through. >> the courts have ruled against. >> rose: courts in the united states have ruled against that. >> and we applauded that. but at the end of the day you know that that decision -- >> rose: most americans, most americans believe that a ban on the basis of religion is an affront to what america stands for. >> or nationality. >> rose: or nationality.
12:39 pm
>> yes, i would agree with that. but does president trump. >> rose: i can't speak for president trump. i can say though that it is always a pleasure to have you here. >> good to be with you again. >> rose: good to have you here. >> thank you for the conversation. >> rose: come back soon. thanks. >> rose: at a time when $200 million franchise dominates the box office many worry about the diminishing role of the director as a film visionary. in the comedy genre the director is still the driving voice of the film. joining me are three of the top comedy film makers working today. judd apatow director of such films as the 40 year old virgin and train wreck in the television series freaks and geeks and girls. michael showalter director of the big six and crow creator of the tv series search party. lucia aniello writer and director of rough night and
12:40 pm
comedy central series -- i assume we're talking about directing and inspiring comedy. >> that's what we do. >> i just like hearing you the words american summer. that was the best part of it. >> rose: let me start with you. what inspired you to do what you do. >> to make cheated. you know charlie i always want to be a stand up comedian when i was kid. i never thought about making movies. i didnt watch movies to pay attention to the angles. never talked about the lenses or framing. i just liked seinfeld and leno. i immediate gary shandling and he talked about comedy coming from a deep awe honest place watching him explore his own life and his own spiritual quest, i got inspired to slowly attempt to figure out how high i knew that. >> rose: you would have made it interesting for you. what inspired you.
12:41 pm
>> well, similarly i actually came from performing initially and then nobody would cast me. so i went from there to kind of being like well i had studied film in college and i figured i knew how to make things so i would start to make videos. i definitely feel like i'm part of this kind of digital generation. as soon as i was able to start making a few videos, i found that it was really really satisfying to just make things because i was able to control as much as possible and comedy's really the only thing i feel like i can understand what the target is and whether or not i'm hitting it. so i'm really giving myself very few options. >> rose: to know comedy, do you have to be, do you have to have a certain central thing at your own core? to get it. to create it. >> at least for me i really try to go with my gut and i like to try to think i'm relatively self
12:42 pm
actualized to an extent i can know what my government is telling me. so i try not to be too heady about it and in that way i think that i can at least say i not what's funny to me and i really use that as my north star. >> rose: and you? >> i had a few uh-huh moments. when i saw animal house, that was a big uh-huh moment. i was in fourth grade subsequent to see it in a movie theatre and i was cant valuated -- captivated by john belushi. my sister i went to visit my sister she went to college and there was an improv group and she took me to see the improve group the purple crown they were called and i was just blown away by that. that's with a i want to do when i go to college. then when i went to college i
12:43 pm
joined a sketch comedy troop not thinking that it was going to become my career. i figured i would go and do, teach and go to be a college teacher or something like that and here i am. >> rose: is being a performer helpful being behind the camera? >> i think so because you know what, you get an idea what it's like to be an actor and i think that's very helpful to know what kind of colleges the actor mate be dealing with internally and you may be able to speak their language. >> rose: you know where they are. >> yes. >> i think so because i try not to act because it doesn't go well. when people ask me to do like a little quick thing what i've always noticed you're by yourself and you're just waiting for anyone to walk over and go it's not going terribly. you're very nervous and needy while you're doing it. >> rose: you don't want to ask how am i doing. >> you just sit there and wait
12:44 pm
for someone. people don't tell you if you're doing something wrong and they show they're happy by not talking to you. >> i think of it as they are kind of like stunt people. they are like i need help because i'm going to turn myself inside out right now and you need to tell me if that's okay. it's good to know how vulnerable it can be when they're doing that. >> in the big sick i thought camille had to be remotional he was reliving these moments in his life when his girlfriend's life is at risk and he would turn to michael. >> it's kind of like baseball players running from third and you're like go home it's okay we're just going our hardest. >> rose: take a look at this. this is from the big sick.
12:45 pm
this is where they meet at the bar after she has interrupted his stand up set. here it is. >> hi. >> hi. >> my name is kumail. >> we saw you perform. >> now that the niceties are out of the way when you yelled 59 me it really through me off. you shouldn't heckle comedians. it's so rude. >> i didn't heckle you. >> it's a common misconception. but yelling anything at a comedian it's considered heckling. heckling didn't have to be negative. >> if i yelled out you're amazing in bed, would that be a heckle. >> yes. it would be an accurate heckle. >> you scared my friend off now. >> rose: what do we say about
12:46 pm
that comedy. >> i think it follows in the tradition of trying to be as truthful as possible. what i notice about it is it's not torqued up. that's life. and it's still very funny because i feel like in life ird that you don't need tod make it much broader for it to be funny. >> rose: what broad generalizations can we make about making comedy whether etcetera sketch comedy or stand up. broad generalizations about who is drawn to it, who does well at it, that kind of thing. >> i've been talking to people now that the big sick is coming out. i think comedians, there's a late of stuff in the big sick where we see comedians back stage talking to each other. bantering. there's a competitiveness but there's also a lot of come -- camaraderie, when you get a
12:47 pm
bunch of comedians tokyo there's a way they talk to each other it's not something learned it's just who we are. the same way you get five musicians together there's a very good chance you start to jam. the people who aren't like musicians want to leave the room. >> rose: you did something separate for youtube. >> yes. i was doing improv here in new york but i was making a lot of sketch videos for the internet, yes. >> rose: how did they find you. >> youtube.com. >> rose: i know that. >> no, of course. i mean generally, you know, when we began making videos because i make videos with my partner and we basically were able to find kind of a weird little niche which was basically like you want to make things that had a hook to them that were quick and that people would want to share not just because it had a relatable moafnlt because it was something about it i especially
12:48 pm
pop culture and exacerbate that. it's interesting to adapt it to tv and film because it doesn't adapt that easily. realizing the medium is the message has also really informed the way that we right and the way that we try to produce things. >> rose: but you can also, i've read this, it has somehow caught on in youtube and you can leap forward. >> yes. >> rose: amazingly fast. >> absolutely. people feel like they're watching a unique voice or you have kind of like you're saying before som comedy want to do some series stuff and does everybody who does serious stuff wish they could do comedy. my impression is people who do comedy want to show they can do serious stuff. people who are serious wish they could do comedy but they can't.
12:49 pm
>> genre didn't always have an underpinning to comedy. people sometimes can understand and some of the great directors made some of the great serious movies and some of the great funny moves of all time but i think if you're deadly serious -- >> that thing of funny in your bones, you notice people are funny in his bones. will ferrell is funny in his bones. he can't help it, it's spilling out of him. there are things like you can't help it. they're funny. you're like i wasn't even joking when people think you're being serious. >> rose: which do you think the most. is it about comedy since you do more comedy. >> i like comedy and i like when comedies make you feel something. so i've worked on a lot of comedies i'm proud of. i did somrody movies like walk hard and i was a writer that you don't mess with the --
12:50 pm
i love the big silly stuff but the moment when you feel you get emotional within a comedy if you can make people cry within the same movie that always feels like something special. >> rose: any differencing in directing for film versus television. >> for me it was definitely thinking about the audience and thinking about a group of one or two or three people watching something in their living room versus a crowd of 400 people and the way they can react to something, they kind of need to slap something together. for me i definitely learned a lot about the timing, the natural rhythm of comedy and how that for me at least changed a little bit from tv to film. it was more about the audience than the writing and directing. but that's something i learned about caring more about the audience. >> rose: do you all want to write stuff you direct or direct stuff you write. >> yes. i've done that. this one was where i directed
12:51 pm
something that kumail and emily wrote. but you find things in it that you feel are personal so you feel you're there too. >> rose: did they come to you. >> no. i begged judd to hire me. >> rose: you don't hire me to do this then this will be a disaster for you believe me. >> yes, that but not as bluntly put. but you say i he passionate believe in this movie. >> and he manipulated me. >> rose: seems to me knowing you and all you made to this show and the nice things you say about us, that you like doing everything. do you want to be both an owner and a player. you really want to. >> every project is different. i saw a nice movie hello my name is doris which sally fields started in and i remember warming it in my house and i remember going this is great. and i loved the tone because it was so funny and it was so real
12:52 pm
that as soon as we started talking about we do this, i thought i could do this with friend that kumail and emily had. and then i'm happy not to do it. the thing is if i think it will work without me i'll sit at home. >> you're not happy to sit at home. judd was really, you know, passionate, hands on really involved at every stain for someone as busy. >> rose: was that good for you or not. >> it was great, it was amazing. you have someone who has an amount of experience as judd and you have great success and it helps when you been talk about the movie thing. i mean the process of screening the movie and getting the feedback from the audience and i feel like judd has a lot of expertise understanding like how
12:53 pm
to tweak the edit to make the audience, i don't know if you can speak to that but that fofs me a really amazing thing for me to get feedback and apply it to editor. >> for tv you never have to go through that. we have a show called love in netflix. we just edit it ask we're done, we just chuck it on tv. we don't know where the labs are or whether it worked or not. it's just pure, your opinion of watching your show. but when you're doing a movie for hundreds of people, you need to make them make noise. and it is a communal experience, and so you listen and you go i think the lab is supposed to be here but we're not getting a laugh here at here and you talk about the adjustments you can make and finally the movie has a musical writ only of interaction with the consulted that they're responding in a way you want a them too. i don't know if it's better or
12:54 pm
not. i thought my first knocked up was better before i started tweaking to this audience. >> rose: at the a favorite person to work with. >> we have fun time corroborating and talking about fun things at home for years, you know, what's possible. i had a great time with adam sand her, an old friend of mine, someone i spend time with. but everybody. steve karel. my wife is going to make a movie with him and i'm just jealous. >> rose: why did you go back to stand up. >> you got tired of being in the editing room as a sweaty man for years and years. people get stale and they're not in touch with the audience. they don't know what's funny or what people are thinking about and it's really helpful to just understand what you do if you're just by yourself i think it's a little harder. yes i'm going to be at the
12:55 pm
wilbur in boston on the 24th, if you're looking to promote that charlie. >> rose: we just did. thank you, michael. thank you judd. thank you for joining us. see you next time. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
12:56 pm
>> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. >> you're watching pbs.
12:57 pm
12:58 pm
12:59 pm
1:00 pm
the following kqed production was produced in high definition. ♪ calories, calories, calories! >> wow, it rocked my world! >> it just kind of reminded me of boot camp. >> i don't know what you had, but what i had was great. >> it almost felt like country club food to me. >> don't touch. it's hot! >> i gotta tell you, you people are getting me all excited with all these d

10 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on